DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD -FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
HD: hd
Docket No. 06958-09
28 January 2010
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the
United States Code, section 1552. ,
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 28 January 2010. Your allegations of error and |
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted
of your application, together with all material submitted in
support thereof and applicable statutes, regulations and
policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory
opinion furnished by the Bureau of Naval Personnel dated
6 October 2009, a copy of which is attached. The Board also
considered your letter dated 30 December 2009 with enclosures.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. The Board duly noted the supporting
statements you submitted and the findings in your favor by the
investigating officer and the Navy Personnel Command staff judge
advocate concerning your complaint under Article 138, Uniform
Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). However, the Board
substantially concurred with the advisory opinion and the
Commander, Naval Special Warfare Command letter dated 15 July
2008, Subject: Complaint of Wrongs under Article 138, UCMd by
[you] in concluding the removal of. your Navy Enlisted
Classification (NEC) code 5326 (SEAL (sea, air and land forces)
combatant swimmer) was adequately substantiated, that it was not
in reprisal for actions you had taken to resolve issues in your
unit, and that the irregularities in administrative procedure
were not material. In view of the above, your application has
been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel
will be furnished upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have
the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and
material evidence or other matter not previously considered by
the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that
a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official
naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
ons
'
W. DEAN PRERF
Executive Diyettor
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07776-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 July 2003. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 10 February ahd 3 March 2003, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Personnel Programs) letter dated 21 June 2002, Subject: Complaint of Wrongs under Article 138, UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice), and the memorandum for the record dated...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06031-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05799-01
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. ’s statement ’s evaluation c. In reviewing petitions that question the exercise of the reporting senior ’s action or that the reporting senior acted for an illegal or improper purpose. The fitness report itself represents the opinion of the reporting senior.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 05938-05
The Board also considered your letter dated 30 November 2006 with attachments.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. This responds to your request (enclosure (1)) for comments and recommendation on subject Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) petition. is have reviewed enclosure (1) and recommend applicant’s petition be denied.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08254-07
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 15 November 2007, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.Sincerely,W. The member states the evaluation report was adverse because of his previous reporting senior contacting the reporting senior at the Transfer Personnel Unit.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 09315-04
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The member’s statement and reporting senior’s endorsement is filed in the member’s record. d. The reporting senior is charged with commenting on the performance or characteristics of each member under his/her command and determines what material will be included in a fitness report.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03555-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, | regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09300-08
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Your application asserts, essentially, that you were compelled to elect a 1 June 2007 retirement date vice al August 2007 retirement date due to a hostile environment at your command. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to _ demonstrate the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01496-06
You further impliedly requested removing all documentation of your nonjudicial punishment (NJP) of 22 June 2005 and the vacation of suspension of your reduction to pay grade E-4 on 19 August 2005.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, consideredyour application on 7 December 2006. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07510-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 September 2002. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 29 October 2001 and 25 March 2002, copies of which are attached. Based on our review of the material provided, we find the following: a.